High-resolution gridded temperature products are critical inputs to assessments of climate impacts on local hydrology, ecosystem processes, and biotic communities. However, there has been little formal analysis on the ability of these products to accurately capture temporal variability and trends in local climate. Here, I will review the development of a new gridded daily temperature dataset aimed at improving spatial and temporal representations of air temperature at the topoclimatic spatial scale, the scale at which air temperature is influenced by local topography and land surface properties. From a spatial perspective, I will first examine how remotely sensed land skin temperature can be used as a key covariate in spatial interpolations of air temperature. Second, I will examine how homogenization algorithms are critical for reducing significant temporal biases in gridded topoclimatic air temperature, especially in the complex terrain of the western U.S. Lastly, I will summarize the current state of topoclimate products in the U.S. and how they can be further improved to meet the needs of local climate impact assessments and adaptation decision-making.

Andrew Light, Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy, George Mason University

Andrew Light is a professor and director of the Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy at George Mason University and a consultant at the U.S. Department of State, where he served as a senior climate change adviser.

Last December over 190 countries met in Paris for the 21st meeting of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change where they succeeded in creating a new international climate agreement. Many have heralded the outcome as a groundbreaking achievement for international diplomacy and global climate action. Others have argued that the climate commitments that parties brought to the table in Paris are ultimately too weak to achieve the agreements’ lofty aspirations. To better understand the significance of the new Paris Agreement we will review the recent history of the UN climate negotiations, and how this outcome evolved from earlier failed attempts in this process. A more important question however may be what new future for global climate cooperation is now required of us after Paris. To close the current gap between the Paris pledges for emission reductions, and what is needed to achieve our long-term goals for climate stabilization, we may need to look beyond the UN system to find new opportunities for enhanced climate action.

Julie Quinn, School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Cornell University

U.S. Chairmanship of the Arctic Council and Strategy for the Arctic Region Symposium

Tuesday 20 October 2015

Sutliff Auditorium, Lewis Katz Building, Penn State University

Robert Mendelsohn, Yale University

Energy and Environmental Economics and Policy seminar: Adapting to Catastrophe: Living in a Warmer World

Wednesday 14 October 2015

157 Hosler Building, Penn State University

A driving concern about global warming is that it might lead to a climate related catastrophe. This talk discusses two of those catastrophes: “Melting of the West Antarctic Ice Sheet” and “Ecosystem Collapse” and discusses how we could possibly survive these events. The talk combines science and e”conomics to first understand the nature of these events and then to discuss adaptation. Although the cumulative consequence of either event involves enormous change, in practice, these changes are expected to unfold slowly. By gradually changing ecosystem and coastal management over time, society can cope. Nonetheless, there will be some challenges that require thinking outside the box.

Dr. David Budescu, Fordham Univeristy

SCRiM Seminar: Aggregating Information by Harnessing the “Wisdom of Crowds”: New Theoretical Results and Empirical Findings

Monday 12 October 2015

215 Business, Penn State University

SCRiM's Summer School on Sustainable Climate Risk Management

Monday 3 August 2015

102 Oak, Penn State University

Inequality and the Economic Analysis of Climate Change

School of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Duke’s Center for Law, Economics, and Public Policy with the collaboration of the SCRiM network